Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 6]

Chattisgarh High Court

Suresh Das Goswami vs State Of Chhattisgarh 14 Wps/6446/2018 ... on 28 September, 2018

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                            1

                                                                                 NAFR
                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                WPS No. 6455 of 2018

             Suresh Das Goswami S/o L.P. Goswami, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
             Rampur, Tahsil Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
                                                                         ---Petitioner
                                            Versus
       1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural
          Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur
          Chhattisgarh.
       2. The District Education Officer, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
       3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, District
          Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
       4. The Block Education          Officer,   Chhuriya,   District   Rajnandgaon
          Chhattisgarh.
       5. Sukluram Shyamji, Posted As Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Middle
          School, Ghortalab, Block Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ---Respondents

For petitioner : Shri Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For State : Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 28/09/2018

1. The challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the order Annexure-P/1 dated 18/08/2018 whereby the services of the petitioner has been transferred from Govt. Middle School, Ghortalab, Block-Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon to Govt. Middle School, Pendridih, Block-Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.).

2. Without entering into the merits of the case, the counsel for the petitioner wants that the petitioner may be permitted to make a 2 representation to the respondents and the respondents in turn may decide the same as expeditiously as possible.

3. Not opposed.

4. Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioner if he so chooses may prefer a detailed representation to the respondents. Considering the fact that it is a case of transfer, the respondents may decide it as expeditiously as possible.

Sd/-


                                                           (P. Sam Koshy)
Sumit                                                          JUDGE